Monday, April 02, 2012

Proposal: Conspicuous Gumption

Times out 6 votes to 3. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 04 Apr 2012 06:32:53 UTC

In the rule “Cycle Resolution”, replace “The Net should announce which Players Influenced which Institutions, but not how any Players specifically Directed their Resources.” with:-

The Net should announce which Players Influenced which Institutions, and how many Resources were Directed by those Players to those Institutions. (But not how many Resources Players directed to Institutions that they failed to Influence.)

We can kind-of work out the bidded Resources by combing through the GNDT, but it’s fiddly work, and isn’t possible where someone wins two bids in the same cycle. This gives an edge to players who can be bothered to do the sums, or who happen to be lucky (or rich) enough to win two bids at once. For the sake of clarity and error-checking, maybe it should just be public.

Comments

Patrick:

02-04-2012 11:46:35 UTC

against

Josh: Observer he/they

02-04-2012 12:17:18 UTC

for

Yonah:

02-04-2012 12:37:01 UTC

against I really like the uncertainty. This is a game of resource commitment, and such games are vastly more interesting when the players have imperfect information.

Kevan: he/him

02-04-2012 12:51:33 UTC

[Yonah] This is isn’t really changing the visible information, it’s just making it more prominent. The useful information about winning bids (and therefore the perceived value of resources) is freely available, but only to players who take the time to comb through the GNDT log. Removing the ability of rich/lucky players to have their individual winning bids hidden doesn’t like seem a great loss.

Cpt_Koen:

02-04-2012 12:56:34 UTC

for
I would like to add “The Net should also announce how much Credits each Player earned while restocking.”

southpointingchariot:

02-04-2012 13:03:47 UTC

for Completely agree - uncertainty is good, but encouraging droll calculation in the GNDT is bad.

Clucky: he/him

02-04-2012 16:00:25 UTC

against It is changing the visible information though, especially if we announce how many restocking credits people get.

southpointingchariot:

02-04-2012 16:14:01 UTC

I agree about restocking, but not winning directions.

Yonah:

02-04-2012 16:54:27 UTC

[Koen] I disagree both that this isn’t changing visible information and that obtaining the info currently available takes that much work. Simply by glancing at the GNDT sidebar and comparing it with the last cycle’s resolution post, you can easily see what each player’s net gain/loss of credits/marines were, which is the only information you’d need the GNDT for. This information is useful, but there are many cases where it doesn’t necessarily allow you to deduce the size of winning bids. For example, this last cycle Patrick influenced the Mine, and his net credits remained the same. From this we guess that he sent 4 credits to the Mine and split the other 4 out for income, but it is also possible that he sent only 2 or 3 at the Mine and sent 2 or 3 at some other institution which he failed to influence.

Clucky: he/him

02-04-2012 18:54:57 UTC

If you show how much they bid for the stuff they won, everyone can figure out how much they restocked though so you might as well show it too.

Yonah:

03-04-2012 02:20:58 UTC

Another point: Implementing this would massively cheapen the Watchtower institution.

Soviet Brendon:

03-04-2012 06:02:07 UTC

against

Kevan: he/him

03-04-2012 09:14:19 UTC

Give the latest Cycle results may have at least one human-error in them, I’d really rather we were able to double-check the results, even if this removes some oblique “it looks like people think the Mine is worth 4, but maybe it was only worth 2 and Patrick chose not to pick up the free money” shadows.

Josh: Observer he/they

03-04-2012 10:24:54 UTC

It’s not like this proposal is the end to ambiguity. In many ways it exposes deeper, more interesting ambiguities, especially as resource inflation allows for more complex orders.

Patrick:

03-04-2012 11:45:57 UTC

for CoV

Klisz:

04-04-2012 02:18:08 UTC

for